Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Forming Gentoo Policy - Copyright Assignment and Attribution

[Alec Warner]

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Andreas K. Huettel
<dilfridge@g.o> wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 12. März 2013, 00:12:43 schrieb Rich Freeman:
>> So, clarification now that I'm back at a keyboard...
>>
>> DCO is mandatory, and is simply a declaration that the committer has
>> checked and the new code is distributed under the license chosen for
>> the project (see original email for details, but generally
>> GPL/BSD/etc).  The Linux kernel is the main model for this.  Since
>> Gentoo is not always being assigned copyright we need to have a clear
>> declaration that the code is available under a suitable free license
>> so that we can further distribute it.

If you read earlier in the thread, you will see an example of a DCO.
My naive understanding is that a DCO helps shore up the legal defense
the foundation may have when inevitable violations occur.

A DCO is mentioned in step 12:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=blob;f=Documentation/SubmittingPatches#l298

>>
>> FLA is optional, and is essentially a copyright assignment (or
>> reasonable facsimile in certain jurisdictions designed by the FSFe).
>> KDE is the main model for this.
>
> Which obviously means, now if everyone signs a KDE with GPL'ed key and sends
> it with SPF to TGF (The Gentoo Foundation), everything is IPO. (In Perfect
> Order.)

http://fsfe.org/activities/ftf/fla.en.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributor_License_Agreement

>
> Seriously, could you repeat this for laymen and non-americans?

Hey it all makes sense for us Americas, its you Europeans that make
stuff all complex :)

>
> --
>
> Andreas K. Huettel
> Gentoo Linux developer
> dilfridge@g.o
> http://www.akhuettel.de/
>